Arpit Yadav @ Honey Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5996 MP

                                                         1
                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                           AT JABALPUR
                                                  BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                            ON THE 23rd OF APRIL, 2022

                                  MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 17718 of 2022

                      Between:-
           1.         ARPIT YADAV @ HONEY YADAV S/O VIRENDRA KUMAR
                      YADAV GUPTA , AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                      STUDENT R/O LALMATI CHANDMARI P.S. GHAMAPUR,
                      DISTT. JABALPUR, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

           2.         ROHIT @ MONTI SHUKLA S/O RAM PRASAD SHUKLA ,
                      AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O CHANMARI TALAIYA NEAR
                      WATER , POLICE STATION GHAMAPUR (MADHYA
                      PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....PETITIONER
                      (BY SHRI SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY, ADVOCATE)

                      AND

                      THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
                      STATION BARGI DISTRICT- JABALPUR, M.P. (MADHYA
                      PRADESH)

                                                                                    .....RESPONDENTS
                      (BY SHRI VIJAY SONI, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                   This bail application coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the

          following:
                                                     ORDER

This is first application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity "Cr.P.C") for grant of bail to the applicants Arpit Yadav and Rohit @ Monti Shukla, who are in custody since 18.10.2021 in connection with Crime No.575/2021 registered at Police Station Bargi, District Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of Excise Act and Section 130(3) & 177 of Motor Vehicle Act.

It is submitted that the applicants have been made accused on memorandum. The whole story of prosecution is probable. It is submitted that recovery of 1785.76 liter foreign liquor has been seized from the Mini Truck of Ishar Company bearing no. M.P. 19 G.A. 4606 from under the sacs of paddy. Allegation on the present applicants is that they were travelling in two cars which were escorting and following the truck and as soon as they saw Signature SAN Verified the Not police party will turned back and ran away. Thus, they have been made accused on the memorandum Digitally signed by of Amit Poriya and Ashwani Patel.

MOHD TABISH KHAN Date: 2022.04.25 19:26:06 IST

It is submitted that the applicants are innocent, they have been falsely implicated, there are several loopholes in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. However, it is admitted that out of 11 witnesses 10 witnesses have already been examined before the trial Court. It is submitted that witnesses of the seizure have turned hostile.

However, Shri Vijay Soni, learned Government Advocate submits that there is direct involvement of the applicants. They were travelling in modern vehicles equipped with power steering and put escape the police custody as soon as they came to see police party waiting for intercepting the truck. Such a huge quantity has been recovered, which has a very disastrous impact on the youth. The batch number of liquor was not melt for sale within the District of Jabalpur. It is also submitted that trial is about to be concluded, 10 out of 11 witnesses have been examined, therefore, no indulgence be shown in the matter.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record and also taking into consideration and law laid down by the Supreme Court in case of Ms.Y Vs. State of Rajasthan and Another in Criminal Appeal No.649/2022 arising out of SLP (CRL) No.7893/2021 decided on 19.04.2022, wherein placing reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in Gurcharan Singh & Ors Vs. State (Delhi Administration), 1978(1) SCC 118, parameters have been laid down before granting bail namely; nature and gravity of the circumstances in which offence is committed; the position and status of the accused with reference to the victim and the witnesses; the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice; of repeating the offence; of jeopardising his own life being faced with a grim prospect of possible conviction in the case; of tempering with the witnesses; the history of the case as well as its investigation are to be considered.

In the present case, when case of the applicants is examined from this perspective then it is evident that the applicants are influential person, co-accused Chotu Mali has a criminal record of 12 cases, quantity of liquor is excessive, Trial is about to be concluded and the witness who is one of the most crucial witness mainly owner of the truck, taking all these facts into consideration, I am of the opinion that since trial is going to be concluded only one witness is left, at this point of time that cannot be appreciation of the evidence recorded before the trial Court and when the parameters laid down by the Supreme Court in case of Gurcharan Singh (supra) and Ms. Y (supra) taken into consideration, this is not a fit case to extend the benefit of the bail to the applicants for the present.

Accordingly, application fails and is dismissed.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE Tabish